The Rev. Vosper Again

[chansen]

What would make Christianity more appealing to them, IYO?

Well the hypocrisy doesn't help.

Look, you guys have a problem just with what you believe. That's not helping you appeal to young people. In the culture wars, Christians as a whole are losing or have lost, but the weird thing is the UCCan was mostly on the winning side, and yet you lost as well. How the hell you managed to pick the winning side and still lose members, I have no idea. That's a talent. You're the obvious landing place in Canada for disenfranchised Christians from more insane denominations, but you won't take those denominations on. You save your fight for atheists. But you're not converting any atheists. You're just alienating them.

It's curious how, in a time of declining religiousity, the least religious Christian denomination in Canada is losing people fastest. And your answer, according to many, is to become more faithful. The disconnect is breathtaking.

 

[Waterfall]

You're the obvious landing place in Canada for disenfranchised Christians from more insane denominations.

I'm not UCC, and I'm not seeing those disenfranchised moving towards the UCC if they were they would be filling the empty pews. They're not.
The disenfranchised probably just remain that way]

 

[Waterfall]

It's curious how, in a time of declining religiousity, the least religious Christian denomination in Canada is losing people fastest.

Usually declining religiousity doesn't necessarily indicate that hole is being fulfilled through atheism, more often it's a reassessment of whether church is necessary to continue with their spirituality or whether they should place themselves in a church with a stronger commitment to the early churches teachings.

 

[chansen]

Usually declining religiousity doesn't necessarily indicate that hole is being fulfilled through atheism, more often it's a reassessment of whether church is necessary to continue with their spirituality or whether they should place themselves in a church with a stronger commitment to the early churches teachings.

You can not be serious.

 

[Waterfall]

You can not be serious.

Well at lot of young people seem to be unfamiliar with church as an alternative having not been raised within it. Most of the mega churches recruit this segment.

 

[chansen]

And they're terrible at it. The numbers point to megachurches losing millennials, too. Despite what they say.

 

[paradox3]

Have been following the logical progression of this thread with some difficulty. The conversation at hand began here:

In the Trump thread @Carolla posted this link from our UCCan Moderator - http://www.united-church.ca/news/moderator-i-love-donald-trump . It might be interesting, for those in the UCCan, to read it through and change the name Trump to Vosper.

What we don't know is why Inukshuk suggests substituting Vosper's name for Trump.

Is she drawing a comparison between the two individuals? Comparing reactions to the two of them? Suggesting we are to love everyone?

Further explanation would be helpful.

 

[paradox3]

Here we have a little more from Inukshuk:

Our Moderator has asked us to put into practice what I think is the hardest of Jesus' teachings - to love each other. So I am wondering how her words about Trump will play out in the Vosper decision. Moderators comments slightly edited in italics below;

"Although I have serious misgivings about his/her policies and pronouncements, he/she is a child of God, just like me, so I must treat him/her with dignity, respect, and love."
"Our political/religious diversity is a gift to celebrate. But regardless of our political/religious differences, as Christians, we share a common commitment to live out the gospel values of love and justice."
"Here is where we must lay aside our partisan politics/religious differences and recognize that we need each other’s strength, wisdom, and friendship if we are going to stop the rising tide of hate that threatens to wash over us."
"It is urgent that all people of faith and goodwill unite and muster our collective spiritual resources"
" The love that we are called to embody as followers of Christ demands that we defend the dignity and worth, the well-being and integrity of everyone—"
"The question I am asking myself today is “How can I be a minister of reconciliation in these fractured times?” It’s a question that I challenge you to think about as well."

Then Waterfall said:

Loving your enemy doesn't necessarily mean you continue to be indiscriminate about who you place in leadership does it?

I was assuming Waterfall was placing Inukshuk's comments in the context of the Gospel. Using shorthand, if you will, to ask a very good question about leadership in the church.

I did not take Waterfall to be saying Gretta was an enemy of anyone's.

 

[paradox3]

You're the obvious landing place in Canada for disenfranchised Christians from more insane denominations, but you won't take those denominations on. You save your fight for atheists. But you're not converting any atheists. You're just alienating them.

It's curious how, in a time of declining religiousity, the least religious Christian denomination in Canada is losing people fastest. And your answer, according to many, is to become more faithful. The disconnect is breathtaking.

In my view there is no need to "take other denominations on". Do you think we should be fighting with them? We do have former members of other denominations in our pews already. Are you wanting us to publicly denounce these other denominations somehow?

Neither do I see us fighting for atheists anywhere. We do talk to them if they show up.

I don't know if we are losing people faster than anyone else. We are losing them, though, you are right about that.

According to many, the answer is to become less faithful and as we know, Gretta Vosper has been able to rebuild one congregation (to some extent) using this strategy. But I keep coming back to the Unitarian Universalists . . . as liberal as a denomination as any you will ever find. People are not exactly knocking down the UU doors.

 

[chansen]

You are lousy spokespeople for Christianity. You'll let other Christians make Christianity look ignorant and backward, and you won't say a thing. Rev. Vosper comes along, and you'll write countless Facebook comments and letters to the editor about her.

It takes Gretta Vosper to marshall the UCCan troops. What other issue has gotten this many people in the UCCan worked up?

 

[revsdd]

You are lousy spokespeople for Christianity. You'll let other Christians make Christianity look ignorant and backward, and you won't say a thing. Rev. Vosper comes along, and you'll write countless Facebook comments and letters to the editor about her.

It takes Gretta Vosper to marshall the UCCan troops. What other issue has gotten this many people in the UCCan worked up?

Honestly - you seem more worked up than most of us.

 

[Luce NDs]

Should someone be disturbed by the lack of Pragmatic input and output?

 

[Inukshuk]

Have been following the logical progression of this thread with some difficulty. The conversation at hand began here:

What we don't know is why Inukshuk suggests substituting Vosper's name for Trump.

Is she drawing a comparison between the two individuals? Comparing reactions to the two of them? Suggesting we are to love everyone?

Further explanation would be helpful.

Sorry for the confusion. I am not comparing Trump to Vosper, nor do I think Vosper is an enemy. Simply put - and to paraphrase our Moderator - can we put aside our differences and work with Vosper to pursue love and justice?

 

[paradox3]

Thanks for adding some clarity to the discussion. What does "working with Vosper to pursue love and justice" mean to you?

 

[Inukshuk]

but the weird thing is the UCCan was mostly on the winning side, and yet you lost as well. How the hell you managed to pick the winning side and still lose members, I have no idea. .

We are a humble group and evangelism and marketing are not our greatest strengths.

 

[Inukshuk]

post 387

"Given the interfaith/intercultural relationships that the United Church seems to be working on, maybe there is wiggle room to rebrand West Hill as 'a partner' of the United Church of Canada. Using the Lund Principle "that churches should act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately."

 

[revsdd]

post 387

"Given the interfaith/intercultural relationships that the United Church seems to be working on, maybe there is wiggle room to rebrand West Hill as 'a partner' of the United Church of Canada. Using the Lund Principle "that churches should act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately."

I think your suggestion is worth exploring. There are a lot of questions, mind you - first and foremost what would it mean in this context to be "a partner" of the United Church of Canada. That leads into all sorts of technical questions. Are they still a United Church congregation? Would they be - if the remits pass - one of the more loosely organized "communities of faith" that are a part of the United Church? Or, would they be independent? If outside the United Church then, of course, the inevitable - "the building doesn't belong to them, so what happens to it." There would be a lot of questions to answer and possibly some tough discussions to be had.

I agree, though, that there are a lot of shared purposes and goals that we have with Gretta, even if there is no longer (by her own admission) a shared faith and that where we can work together in good conscience for common goals, we should.

 

[BetteTheRed]

I work with all kinds of people, all the time, at work, at church, at home, who don't have a shared faith with me. Unless we were to find ourselves for some reason trying to come to a common vision of Divinity, we "work together in good conscience for common goals" without any difficulty.

 

[paradox3]

post 387

"Given the interfaith/intercultural relationships that the United Church seems to be working on, maybe there is wiggle room to rebrand West Hill as 'a partner' of the United Church of Canada. Using the Lund Principle "that churches should act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately."

Worth exploring, yes. I think the last time this came up for discussion there were comments about how difficult this might be procedure - wise. Involving remits and so on. Lots of questions but they could certainly be asked.

 

[paradox3]

Of course this presumes that Gretta would accept this solution we are creating for her. I am not at all sure that her intention was to wind up as a "partner" of the United Church.

Lots still to happen.